The strategic battle in this fight is definitely what happens when Pacman flurries against Mayweather. Will he force Mayweather to open up and play a stand and trade game? Mayweather's never seen an offensive dynamo with the sheer volume of punches that Manny throws. He simply throws so many punches from so many conventional and unconventional angles that it's hard for anyone not to be overwhelmed.

On the other hand, Manny has never fought anyone with the defensive ability of Floyd. He's so good at the shoulder roll defense and presents such a small target. His counter-punching is incredible.

So what happens? It could play out in a number of ways.

Manny comes forward and unleashes the fury, but Mayweather is able to defend nearly everything. He rarely gets hit and starts counterpunching almost immediately. As the fight wears on, he gets more and more accurate with his counterpunching and manny gets more and more frustrated. Several things could happen here. Floyd could ride his defense to a decision, with Manny not really hurt but very ineffective throughout the fight. Floyd could do well for 4-5 rounds but be suddenly dropped by a Manny flurry, which is a possibility at any time when you are fighting Pac. Or, Floyd's counterpunching could start to take a toll over the course of the fight and he could actually KO Manny.

Manny comes forward and unleashes the fury. Mayweather's defense is good, but he gets hit cleanly a few times. His counterpunching is ok, but not really affecting Manny. Floyd is forced to start trading openly with Manny after a couple rounds of ineffective counterpunching. If that happens, would Floyd be Manny's offensive equal? Would he hit him hard and cleanly? Or would Manny dominate in a slug-it-out fight, that is much more suited to his game?

I consider myself only a casual boxing fan, but I can't see why a lot people are guaranteeing there will be 2, if not 3 fights between these two?

Both stand to make a TON of money just for one fight. It seems that Mayweather only cares about money. In his interview, he states that he feels that he has nothing to prove by fighting Pac-man. PBF saying if he beats/KO's Pac-man, people will say it's allready been done. Obviously he's somewhat putting on a show, but what would he have to prove in a rematch if he beats Pac-man the first time around?

Basically I'm asking is the payday enough to convince PBF to do a rematch if he does beat Pac-man? He really would have everything to lose if that's the case. We know how much he cares about that 0 in the loss column.

I consider myself only a casual boxing fan, but I can't see why a lot people are guaranteeing there will be 2, if not 3 fights between these two?

Their styles/talent (handspeed, ring intuition etc) mesh really well and will prove to be a great fight. Since it'll be an exciting fight and most likely extremely competitive fight, fan interest will be high for a 2nd fight.

It's not a guarantee this will happen. But I'd say it's about 50% they fight a 2nd time if they fight once.

On a side note, I don't buy for a second that Manny will fight floyd then retire (permanently)

There will be a second fight because if the first is epic, there will be huge demand for it. then again, i am surprised that there was no mayweather - de la hoya rematch. so perhaps it will be only one fight.

There will be a second fight because if the first is epic, there will be huge demand for it. then again, i am surprised that there was no mayweather - de la hoya rematch. so perhaps it will be only one fight.

A rematch was set, but then Mayweather retired. It would have been a boring fight anyway, imo.

There will be a second fight because if the first is epic, there will be huge demand for it. then again, i am surprised that there was no mayweather - de la hoya rematch. so perhaps it will be only one fight.

the $ would of been alot smaller the second time around for mayweather vs de lahoya.

it was evident that oscar was shot and could not beat mayweather in a million years.

really? perhaps to people who understand boxing. for common folk it probably looked close w/ hoya throwing so many punches and all his end of round bursts.

yeah, it was not as close as it may of seemed to the casual fan. de lahoya did not stand a chance once floyd started throwing punches. it was a pretty easy fight for mayweather.

the ONLY chance oscar had was for mayweather to throw caution to the wind and stand toe to toe with him and oscar hit him with a lucky punch. other than that happening (floyd is way too smart for that) he had no shot.

if you watch the fight closely, you can see that the vast majority of oscar's punches fail to connect. floyd either slips, blocks or rolls with the punch. it may look good (oscar throwing flurries) but, he failed to "get to" mayweather the whole fight.

... i just watched the 1st 21 seconds of the 11th round and pretty boy hit oscar 7-9 solid (scoring blows) times without oscar even throwing a punch........

if you watch the fight closely, you can see that the vast majority of oscar's punches fail to connect. floyd either slips, blocks or rolls with the punch. it may look good (oscar throwing flurries) but, he failed to "get to" mayweather the whole fight.

How do the referees score this kind of thing? Would it be in Floyd's favour because he is successfully neutralising all of DLH's efforts or would it be in DLH's favour because he is at least throwing punches and trying to be active even if he isn't doing any damage(say for arguments sake that PBF doesn't throw any punches all round or throws very few)?

I think they have general rules on which to score on, but a lot of it is down to personal preference, and that's why there are often big differences between judges scoring the same fight.

Most judges would score the PBF-DLH heavily to Mayweather because he landed far more punches with greater accuracy, however a case can be made to score in favour of DLH for some rounds because of his higher aggression (even though he missed with the vast majority of punches thrown).

Are people really wondering how Floyd can be broke? There are hundreds of NBA/MLB/NFL athletes who live paycheck to paycheck. They save nothing, spend millions on cars, homes, jewelry, etc. They have multiple baby mamas who drain their income. They have posses who sap their money like crazy. They tend to invest in stupid entrepreneurial ventures their friends want to do. There are a TON of athletes who are either living paycheck to paycheck or who go broke less than 2-3 years after retirement.

i know that. this is only surprising because his nickname is also money mayweather. quite a misnomer i guess.

That's the thing, I don't think he can make the same amount of money from two inferior fights. He made $25 mil for the De La Hoya fight...that's a good starting point for discussing hypothetical Pac-PBF numbers. The PPV shares will be massive.

And which two inferior fighters could make him, let's say, $12-15 mil per fight? That's Margarito/Cotto/Mosley territory, and all of those guys are just as much of a threat to his undefeated record. Those are all extremely dangerous fights.

He'll fight Pacquiao because he has no other option left.

I could be wrong but didn't mayweather get paid 10 mil and hoya 25? or did he get a percentage of ppv buys too?

How do the referees score this kind of thing? Would it be in Floyd's favour because he is successfully neutralising all of DLH's efforts or would it be in DLH's favour because he is at least throwing punches and trying to be active even if he isn't doing any damage(say for arguments sake that PBF doesn't throw any punches all round or throws very few)?

Overview of professional scoring:

The scoring is based on a 10 pt Must system, which one boxer must receive 10 pts per round, and the other 9 or less.

Each knock down is a 1 pt deduction.

After that it is broken down into criteria which help the judges decide who is effectively winning, as different fighters have different styles, so it allows, or tries to in considering that.

The 4 areas/criteria for dominating are,

Clean Punching:

A clean punch is one that lands on the scoring area, in face or side of head, front and side of torso with the knuckle portion of the glove. This is often given more weight then other scoring criteria, as it is the effective goal, to hit the other person efficiently. More often.
Effective Aggression:

This is when a fighter demonstrates the ability to create opportunities moving forward and as a result is landing more clean punches. The more aggressive the fighter the more likely this is measured, if even say they were actually really close in scoring. So aggression has it's merits.

Ring Generalship:

This is when a person demonstrates the ability to control the pace of a fight based on whatever their style may be. An aggressive fighter luring his opponent into slugout matches in order to score pts. A defensive opponent maybe trapping a brawler with set ups, counters, controlling distance, various things.

Attention really needs to be paid to the differing styles of fighters when considering ring generalship.

Defence:

Defence is an important aspect of boxing, and has it's own scoring criteria although it is often sadly overlooked. It takes great skill defensively to be effective for pure boxers, over say brawlers, and is far more impressive when considering a total skill set.

Blocking, slipping, parrying, bobbing,weaving, the footwork involved are all things boxers work hard to master, and a great thing to watch for a trained eye as part of an effective defence.

So for each judge when deciding who has won the round and to be awarded the 10 pts, these are the 4 criteria used.